Air Quality Implementation Plan; Alabama; Attainment Plan for the Troy Area 2008 Lead Nonattainment Area, 54835-54841 [2013-21781]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 173 / Friday, September 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules
for construction, modification, and
operation.
b. EPA Analysis: Final approval of
Wyoming’s title V operating permit
program became effective April 23, 1999
(64 FR 8523, Feb. 22, 1990). Interim
approval of the program became
effective February 21, 1995 (60 FR 4563,
January 19, 1995). As discussed in a
previous direct final rule (which
received comments) for interim
approval of the title V program (59 FR
48802, September 23, 1994), the State
demonstrated that the fees collected
were sufficient to administer the
program. In addition, WAQSR chapter
6, section 2, paragraph (o) requires
applicants for construction permits to
pay the costs for DEQ to review and act
on the permit applications. Wyoming’s
submission meets the requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(L) for the 1997 and
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
14. Consultation/participation by
affected local entities: Section
110(a)(2)(M) requires states to provide
for consultation and participation in SIP
development by local political
subdivisions affected by the SIP.
a. Wyoming’s response to this
requirement: The State’s submissions
for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5
infrastructure requirements cite a nonregulatory document (e.g.,
Intergovernmental Cooperation),
approved by EPA on May 3, 1972 (37 FR
10842).
b. EPA Analysis: Wyoming’s submittal
meets the requirements of CAA Section
110(a)(2)(M) for the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
VI. What action is EPA proposing?
In this action, EPA is proposing to
approve the following infrastructure
elements for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS: (A), (B), (C) with respect to
minor NSR and PSD requirements,
(D)(ii), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K),
(L), and (M). EPA is also proposing to
approve revisions to Chapter 6, Section
4, as submitted on May 24, 2012, which
incorporate the requirements of the
2010 PM2.5 Increment Rule; specifically,
revisions to: Chapter 6, Section 4 (a)
Definitions of ‘‘Baseline area’’, ‘‘Major
source baseline date’’, and ‘‘Minor
source baseline date’’; Chapter 6,
Section 4 (b)(i)(A)(I) Table 1 and Table
1 (1), Chapter 6, Section 4 (b)(J)(v)(viii),
and Section 14. EPA proposes to
disapprove the section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)
infrastructure element, related to CAA
128, state boards, for the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS. Finally, in this action,
EPA is taking no action on
infrastructure elements (D)(i) for the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:34 Sep 05, 2013
Jkt 229001
54835
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
costs on Tribal governments or preempt
Tribal law.
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable federal regulations
(42 U.S.C. 7410(k), 40 CFR 52.02(a)).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed
action merely approves some state law
as meeting federal requirements and
disapproves other state law because it
does not meet federal requirements; this
proposed action does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999); is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and,
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have
Tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations,
Greenhouse gases, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated August 28, 2013.
Shaun L. McGrath,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2013–21613 Filed 9–5–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R04–OAR–2013–0173; FRL–9900–62–
Region 4]
Air Quality Implementation Plan;
Alabama; Attainment Plan for the Troy
Area 2008 Lead Nonattainment Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA or Agency).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
a state implementation plan (SIP)
revision, submitted by the State of
Alabama through the Alabama
Department of Environmental
Management (ADEM), to EPA on
November 9, 2012, for the purpose of
providing for attainment of the 2008
Lead National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) in the Troy 2008
Lead nonattainment area (hereafter
referred to as the ‘‘Troy Area’’ or
‘‘Area’’). The Troy Area is comprised of
a portion of Pike County in Alabama
surrounding the Sanders Lead Company
(hereafter referred to as ‘‘Sanders
Lead’’). EPA is proposing to approve
Alabama’s November 9, 2012 SIP
submittal regarding the attainment plan
based on Alabama’s attainment
demonstration for the Troy Area. The
attainment plan includes the base year
emissions inventory requirements, an
analysis of the reasonably available
control technology (RACT) and
reasonably available control measures
(RACM) requirements, reasonable
further progress (RFP) plan, modeling
demonstration of lead attainment and
contingency measures for the Troy Area.
This action is being taken in accordance
with Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and
EPA’s guidance related to lead
attainment planning.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\06SEP1.SGM
06SEP1
54836
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 173 / Friday, September 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules
Written comments must be
received on or before October 7, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R04–OAR–2013–0173 by one of the
following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: R4–RDS@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (404) 562–9019.
4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2013–0173,
Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms.
Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation. The Regional Office’s official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2013–
0173. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through
www.regulations.gov or email,
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly
to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
DATES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:34 Sep 05, 2013
Jkt 229001
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Zuri
Farngalo of the Regulatory Development
Section, in the Air Planning Branch,
Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street,
SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Mr.
Farngalo may be reached by phone at
(404) 562–9152, or via electronic mail at
farngalo.zuri@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What action Is EPA proposing to take?
II. What is the background for EPA’s
proposed action?
III. What is included in Alabama’s attainment
plan submittal for the Troy area?
IV. What Is EPA’s analysis of Alabama’s
submittal for the Troy area?
1. Pollutants Addressed
2. Emissions Inventory Requirements
3. Modeling
4. RACM/RACT
5. RFP Plan
6. Contingency Measures
7. Attainment Date
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What action is EPA proposing to
take?
EPA is proposing to approve
Alabama’s SIP submittal for the Troy
Area, as submitted through ADEM to
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
EPA on November 9, 2012, for the
purpose of demonstrating attainment of
the 2008 Lead NAAQS. Alabama’s lead
attainment plan for the Troy Area
includes a base year emissions
inventory, a modeling demonstration of
lead attainment, an analysis of RACM/
RACT, a RFP plan, and contingency
measures.
EPA has preliminarily determined
that Alabama’s attainment plan for the
2008 Lead NAAQS for the Troy Area
meets the applicable requirements of the
CAA and the ‘‘SIP Toolkit—Attainment
Demonstrations and Air Quality
Modeling,’’ hereafter referred to as the
‘‘SIP Toolkit,’’ dated April 12, 2012,
located at https://www.epa.gov/air/lead/
kitmodel.html. Thus, EPA is proposing
to approve Alabama’s attainment plan
for the Troy Area. EPA’s analysis for
this proposed action is discussed in
Section IV of this proposed rulemaking.
II. What is the background for EPA’s
proposed action?
On November 12, 2008 (73 FR 66964),
EPA revised the Lead NAAQS, lowering
the level from 1.5 micrograms per cubic
meter (mg/m3) to 0.15 mg/m3 calculated
over a three-month rolling average. EPA
established the NAAQS based on
significant evidence and numerous
health studies demonstrating that
serious health effects are associated
with exposures to lead emissions.
Following promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS, EPA is required by the
CAA to designate areas throughout the
United States as attaining or not
attaining the NAAQS; this designation
process is described in section 107(d)(1)
of the CAA. On November 22, 2010 (75
FR 71033), EPA promulgated initial air
quality designations for the 2008 Lead
NAAQS, which became effective on
December 31, 2010, based on air quality
monitoring data for calendar years
2007–2009, where there was sufficient
data to support a nonattainment
designation. Designations for all
remaining areas were completed on
November 22, 2011 (76 FR 72097),
which became effective on December
31, 2011, based on air quality
monitoring data for calendar years
2008–2010.
Effective December 31, 2010, the Troy
Area was designated as nonattainment
for the 2008 Lead NAAQS. This
designation triggered a requirement for
Alabama to submit a SIP revision with
a plan for how the Area would attain the
2008 Lead NAAQS, as expeditiously as
practicable but no later than December
31, 2015. ADEM submitted its SIP
submittal for the Troy Area on
November 9, 2012, which included the
base year emissions inventory and the
E:\FR\FM\06SEP1.SGM
06SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 173 / Friday, September 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules
attainment demonstration. EPA’s
analysis of the submitted attainment
demonstration includes a review of the
pollutant addressed, emissions
inventory requirements, modeling,
RACT and RACM requirements, RFP
plan, and contingency measures for the
Troy Area.
III. What is included in Alabama’s
attainment plan submittal for the Troy
area?
In accordance with section 172(c) of
the CAA and the SIP Toolkit, the
Alabama attainment plan for the Troy
Area includes: (1) An emissions
inventory for the plan’s base year
(2010); and (2) an attainment
demonstration. The attainment
demonstration includes: technical
analyses that locate, identify, and
quantify sources of emissions
contributing to violations of the 2008
Lead NAAQS; analyses of future-year
emissions reductions and air quality
improvements expected to result from
national and local programs; adopted
emission reduction measures with
schedules for implementation; and
contingency measures required under
section 172(c)(9) of the CAA. See 73 FR
67035.
IV. What is EPA’s analysis of
Alabama’s attainment plan submittal
for the Troy area?
A. Attainment Demonstration
Consistent with CAA requirements
(see, e.g., section 172), and 40 CFR
51.117, an attainment demonstration for
a lead nonattainment area must include
a showing that the area will attain the
2008 Lead NAAQS as expeditiously as
practicable. The demonstration must
also meet the requirements of 40 CFR
51.112 and Part 51, Appendix W, and
include inventory data, modeling
results, and emissions reduction
analyses on which the state has based
its projected attainment. In the case of
the Troy Area, EPA is proposing that the
attainment plan submitted by Alabama
is sufficient, and EPA is proposing to
approve individual components of the
plan.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
1. Pollutants Addressed
Alabama’s lead attainment plan
evaluates lead emissions in the Troy
Area within Pike County. There are no
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:34 Sep 05, 2013
Jkt 229001
significant precursors to consider for the
lead attainment plan.
2. Emissions Inventory Requirements
States are required under section
172(c)(3) of the CAA to develop
comprehensive, accurate and current
emissions inventories of all sources of
the relevant pollutant or pollutants in
the area. These inventories provide a
detailed accounting of all emissions and
emission sources by precursor or
pollutant. In the November 12, 2008
Lead Standard (PDF) (99pp, 665k)
rulemaking, EPA finalized the guidance
related to the emissions inventories
requirements. The current regulations
are located at 40 CFR 51.117(e), and
include, but are not limited to, the
following requirements:
• States must develop and
periodically update a comprehensive,
accurate, current inventory of actual
emissions from all source affecting
ambient lead concentrations;
• The SIP inventory must be
approved by EPA as a SIP element and
is subject to public hearing
requirements; and
• The point source inventory upon
which the summary of the baseline for
lead emissions inventory is based must
contain allsources that emit 0.5 or more
tons of lead per year.
For the base-year inventory of actual
emissions, EPA recommends using
either 2010 or 2011 as the base year for
the contingency measure calculations,
but does provide flexibility for using
other inventory years if states can show
another year is more appropriate.1 For
lead SIPs, the CAA requires that all
sources of lead emissions in the
nonattainment area must be submitted
with the base-year inventory. In today’s
action, EPA is proposing to approve the
base year emissions inventory portion of
the SIP revision submitted by Alabama
on November 9, 2012, as required by
section 172(c)(3).
The State of Alabama followed EPA’s
recommendation by using the year of
designation (2010) as the base year in
the November 9, 2012 Lead SIP. Actual
emissions from all sources of lead were
reviewed and compiled, as applicable
and available, for the base year
1 See EPA document titled ‘‘Addendum to the
2008 Lead NAAQS Implementation Questions and
Answers’’ dated August 10, 2012, included in EPA’s
SIP Toolkit located at https://www.epa.gov/air/lead/
kitmodel.html.
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
54837
emissions inventory requirement. All
applicable sources of lead emissions
contained in the Troy nonattainment
area were estimated and included in the
inventory.
The only source of lead emissions
above 0.5 tons per year within the Troy
Area is Sanders Lead, a secondary lead
smelting and refining facility which
processes scrap metal and lead bearing
by-products into refined lead alloys.
Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.117(e), the
facility is the only point source
evaluated as part of this emissions
inventory requirement and is therefore,
the only source that is required to be
evaluated as part of this attainment
demonstration. In addition to complying
with the 2008 Lead NAAQS, the facility
is also subject to the revised Secondary
Lead MACT (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart
X). The facility’s emissions were
calculated using data collected from
stack tests with the application of AP–
42 emissions factors for each source,
and quality assured by ADEM. ADEM
used the EPA 2008 National Emissions
Inventory (NEI)2 to obtain estimates of
the stationary area and nonroad and
onroad mobile emissions for the Troy
Area.
Stationary area source emissions,
shown below in Table 1, were obtained
from the Emissions Inventory System
maintained by EPA which has the most
current information. The nonroad
emissions are negligible and therefore
assumed to be zero for the purpose of
this SIP, and are consistent with the
nonroad 2008 model. The emissions
data for the nonroad category which
includes aircraft (airports), rail and
commercial marine vessels was
obtained from the 2008 NEI version 2.
Onroad lead emissions are negligible
and therefore assumed to be zero,
consistent with MOVES 2010b model
and the 2008 NEI. A more detailed
discussion of the emissions inventory
development can be found in Alabama’s
November 9, 2012 submittal.
Table 1 below shows the level of
emissions calculated in pounds per year
(lbs/year) in the Area for the 2010 base
year, and by emissions source
categories, as provided in Alabama’s
November 9, 2012 attainment plan.
2 Area sources are only required to be submitted
for the NEI every three years, in accordance with
the Air Emissions Reporting Rule and the most
recent release is in the 2008 NEI version 2.
E:\FR\FM\06SEP1.SGM
06SEP1
54838
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 173 / Friday, September 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—2010 AND PROJECTED 2015 LEAD EMISSIONS FOR THE TROY AREA
[Pounds per year]
Year
Onroad
Nonroad
Area
Point
2010 .................................................................................................................
2015 .................................................................................................................
0
0
205.94
205.94
0.56
0.56
7,162
946
Total Reduction ........................................................................................
0
0
0
6,216
EPA evaluated Alabama’s 2010 base
year emissions inventory for the Troy
Area, and made the preliminary
determination that this inventory was
developed consistent with EPA’s
guidance for emissions inventory.
Therefore, pursuant to section 172(c)(3),
EPA is proposing to approve Alabama’s
2010 base year emissions inventory for
the Troy Area. The projected emissions
for 2015 represent an 87 percent
reduction from the base year lead
emissions, and, as discussed in the
modeling section below, provide
sufficient emissions reductions for the
Troy Area to attain the 2008 Lead
NAAQS.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
3. Modeling
The lead attainment demonstration
must include air quality dispersion
modeling developed in accordance with
EPA’s Modeling Guidance.3 The
Alabama modeling analysis was
prepared using EPA’s preferred
dispersion modeling system, the
American Meteorological Society/
Environmental Protection Agency
Regulatory Model (AERMOD) consisting
of the AERMOD (version 12060) model
and two data input preprocessors
AERMET (version 11059) and AERMAP
(version 11103). The non-regulatory
AERMINUTE (version 11325)
meteorological preprocessor and
AERSURFACE (version 08009) were
also used to develop inputs to AERMET.
The Building Profile Input Program for
Plume Rise Model Enhancements was
also used in the downwash-modeling
and incorporated good engineering
practice, and technical procedures.
More detailed information on the
AERMOD Modeling system and other
modeling tools and documents can be
found on the EPA Technology Transfer
Network Support Center for Regulatory
Atmospheric Modeling (SCRAM)
(https://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/) and in
Alabama’s November 9, 2012 SIP
submittal in the docket for this
proposed action (EPA–R04–OAR–2013–
0173) on the www.regulations.gov Web
3 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix W (EPA’s Guideline
on Air Quality Models) (November 2005) located at
https://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/guidance/guide/
appw_05.pdf.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:34 Sep 05, 2013
Jkt 229001
site. A brief description of the modeling
used to support Alabama’s attainment
demonstration follows.
a. Modeling Approach
The following is an overview of the
Sanders Lead modeling approach used
in Alabama’s November 9, 2012 SIP
submittal. This approach was developed
by the URS Corporation, on behalf of
Sanders Lead, and revised based on
comments received from ADEM and
EPA. The basic procedures are outlined
as follows:
• Start with the most recent 2010
emissions estimates for point, area,
volume and mobile sources at Sanders
Lead;
• Develop model inputs using the
AERMOD modeling system including
the:
Æ AERMOD pre-processors AERMET
and AERMINUTE to process five years’
(i.e., 2006–2010) 1-minute
meteorological data from the National
Weather Service (NWS) Montgomery,
Alabama, surface level site (identified as
KMGM) (the closest weather station to
Sanders Lead), based on ADEM’s land
use classifications, in combination with
upper-air meteorological data from the
Birmingham, Alabama, NWS upper-air
sounding site (KBMX);
Æ AERMOD pre-processor AERMAP
to generate terrain inputs for the
receptors, based on a digital elevation
mapping database from the National
Elevation Dataset developed by the U.S.
Geological Survey;
Æ AERMOD pre-processor
AERSURFACE to generate direction
specific land use based surface
characteristics for the modeling;
Æ Define a Cartesian receptor grid
across the nonattainment boundary
(approximately 0.8 miles around the
Sanders Lead facility), with 100 meter
spacing in ambient air to ensure
maximum concentrations are captured;
and
Æ Develop all other input options
commensurate with the Regulatory
Modeling Guidance.
• Perform current and post control
dispersion modeling using the EPA
approved AERMOD modeling system;
• Process AERMOD output through
EPA’s LEADPOST post processor
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(version 12114) deriving the maximum
3 month average rolling design value
across the 5 year meteorological data
period; and
• Document the results in a report
suitable for inclusion as an appendix for
the Troy Area Lead SIP.
b. Modeling Results
The Lead NAAQS compliance results
of the attainment modeling are
summarized in Table 2 below. Table 2
presents the results from the two sets of
AERMOD modeling runs that were
performed. The two modeling runs were
the result of using two different fiveyear (2006–2010) meteorological
datasets based on AERSURFACEdeveloped surface characteristics
representative of the NWS site in
Montgomery, Alabama (NWS MET
Data). The first and second rows of
Table 2 present the surface
characteristics representative of the
Sanders Lead facility site (Facility MET
Data). This procedure was used since
on-site meteorological data was not
available. Modeling with the two sets of
data was also used since on-site
meteorological data are not available at
the Sanders Lead facility.
A background ambient air quality
concentration is required to be added to
the modeled concentrations for the
purpose of developing a lead design
value, such that attainment of the
control strategy is demonstrated. The
background concentration for the SIP
was based on speciated air quality data
from the Montgomery, Alabama airport
monitor (site number 01–101–1002)
from the last two months of 2005 and
the years 2006–2010. The data is
recorded and collected once every 6th
day. Monthly averages of the data from
this period were obtained and used to
develop the 3-month rolling averaged
concentrations. The highest of the 3month averaged concentrations (i.e.,
0.009 mg/m3) was used in the modeled
compliance test (see column 3 of Table
2).
As can be seen in Table 2, the
maximum 3-month rolling average
across all five years of meteorological
data (2006–2010) is less than or equal to
the 2008 Lead NAAQS of 0.15 mg/m3 for
both sets of AERMOD modeling runs.
E:\FR\FM\06SEP1.SGM
06SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 173 / Friday, September 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules
Output from the LEADPOST processor
which details all of the concentrations
can be found in Appendix G of
54839
Alabama’s November 9, 2012 SIP
submittal.
TABLE 2—POST-CONTROL MODELING RESULTS 4
Sanders lead facility impacts
Max 3-mth rolling
average
Background
concentration
Total concentration
NAAQS
Post-Construction ([NWS] MET Data) ...
Post-Construction (Facility MET Data) ..
0.144 μg/m3 ..........
0.139 μg/m3 ..........
0.009 μg/m3 ..........
0.009 μg/m3 ..........
0.15 μg/m3 ............
0.15 μg/m3 ............
0.15 μg/m3 ............
0.15 μg/m3 ............
The pre-control analysis resulted in a
predicted impact of 5.30 mg/m3 (NWS
MET data) and 3.64 mg/m3 (Facility MET
data). The post-control analysis resulted
in a predicted impact of 0.15 mg/m3
(NWS MET data) and 0.15 mg/m3
(Facility MET data). This data indicates
significant reductions in air quality
impact with the future implementation
of the post-construction control plan for
the Sanders Lead facility. This data also
supports that the controls represent
RACM and RACT for the SIP. The
control strategy for the facility as
reflected in its Air Permit No. 210–0005
includes enclosure of the furnace
building and installation of canopy
hoods over each blast furnace and
compliance with the Secondary Lead
MACT (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart X).
More details on the pre- and postconstruction operations at the facility
are included in the Alabama SIP.
Therefore, on this basis, ADEM asserted
that the proposed controls are RACM/
RACT and should be sufficient to attain
2008 Lead NAAQS.
EPA has reviewed the modeling that
Alabama submitted to support the
attainment demonstration for the Troy
Area and has preliminarily determined
that this modeling is consistent with
CAA requirements, Appendix W and
EPA guidance for lead attainment
demonstration modeling.
4. RACM/RACT
a. Requirements for RACM/RACT
CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that
each attainment plan provides for the
implementation of all reasonably
available control measures as
expeditiously as practicable and
attainment of the NAAQS. EPA
interprets RACM, including RACT,
under section 172, as measures that a
state determines to be both reasonably
available and contribute to attainment
as expeditiously as practicable in the
nonattainment area. A comprehensive
discussion of the RACM/RACT
requirement for lead attainment plans
and EPA’s guidance can be found in the
SIP Toolkit.
b. Alabama’s Analysis of Pollutants and
Sources for the Troy Area
Year
maximum
occurred
2010
2010
submittal. The State determined that
controls for lead emissions at Sanders
Lead are appropriate in the Troy Area
for purposes of attaining the 2008 Lead
NAAQS. EPA preliminarily agrees that
Alabama’s determination is supported
by its analysis.
c. Alabama’s Evaluation of RACM/
RACT Control Measures for the Troy
Area
On November 9, 2012, Air Permit No.
210–0005 was issued to Sanders Lead
for additional proposed control
measures to reduce lead emissions. The
Title V permit reflecting RACT controls
is included in Appendix F of the
November 9, 2012 SIP submittal. In
accordance with the schedule in the
Title V permit, Sanders Lead was
required to implement the controls on
or before July 1, 2013. ADEM
represented to EPA that Sanders Lead
has completed implementation of the
RACT controls listed in the permit and
summarized in Table 3 below:
Alabama’s analysis is found in
Chapter 6 of the November 9, 2012 SIP
TABLE 3—SUMMARY OF RACT CONTROLS 5
Description of measure
Explanation
Control and Enclose Furnace Operations ..........
Sanders Lead is proposing to install canopy hoods over each blast furnace with supply air to
reduce worker lead exposures. Additionally, the furnace building will be enclosed. A new
318,000 cubic feet per minute (CFM) baghouse followed by high-efficiency particulate air
(HEPA) filters will be installed to control emissions captured by the new hoods and building
enclosure (including the kettle basement ventilation).
Sanders Lead is proposing to enclose the refining building, including the elimination of sidewall
fans. Area ventilation will be provided by the new 318,000 CFM baghouse discussed above.
Sanders Lead is proposing to control the combustion gases and kettle hoods with a new
60,000 actual cubic feet per minute (ACFM) baghouse (with HEPAs).
Sanders Lead is proposing to relocate the industrial battery decasing operations to the inside
of the existing raw material storage building. A new 60,000 ACFM collector with HEPA filters
will be installed to control industrial battery decasing and raw material storage area.
Sanders Lead is proposing to enclose the Shredder Building and install a new 12,000 ACFM
wet scrubber to control acid emissions from specific point locations within the Shredder
Building. The exhaust from this scrubber along with building exhaust will be exhausted
through a new 60,000 ACFM bag collector (with HEPAs).
Sanders Lead is proposing to enclose the base of baghouses #1 and #5, including the access
doors and removable panels on the units. Ventilation will be provided by ducting to existing
baghouses.
Control and Enclose Refining Operations ..........
Combustion gases and Refining Kettle Hoods ..
Relocate Industrial Battery Decasing and Enclose Raw Material Handling Operations.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Battery Breaker/Shredder Operations ................
Enclose Baghouse Hoppers and Transport of
Dust.
4 Final results listed in Table 2 are rounded
according to 40 CFR part 50, Appendix R;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:34 Sep 05, 2013
Jkt 229001
specifically subsection 4(a) which addresses
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
comparison with the Lead NAAQS, as well as 5(a),
(b), and (c) which addresses rounding conventions.
E:\FR\FM\06SEP1.SGM
06SEP1
54840
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 173 / Friday, September 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 3—SUMMARY OF RACT CONTROLS 5—Continued
Description of measure
Explanation
Improve Process Material Transport to Eliminate Leaded Outdoor Traffic.
In order to eliminate leaded outdoor traffic, Sanders Lead is proposing to install building connection tunnel for the transport of material from shredder to the raw material storage building.
Sanders Lead is proposing to install transfer points at the refining, smelting and raw material
storage vehicle exits to maintain ‘‘leaded’’ vehicles inside the building. Sanders Lead is proposing to relocate leaded vehicle maintenance to a newly enclosed constructed area.
Sanders Lead is proposing to develop an updated watering plan based on the new vehicle
patterns and facility layout. The watering plan will include an improved floor wetting system
inside and outside the building, as well as purchasing new wet sweepers for the outside
buildings.
Relocate and Contain Leaded Vehicle Maintenance.
Improved Watering .............................................
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
d. Proposed Action on RACM/RACT
Demonstration and Control Strategy
EPA is proposing to approve
Alabama’s determination that the
proposed controls for lead emissions at
Sanders Lead constitute RACM/RACT
for that source in the Troy Area based
on our analysis described above.
Further, as summarized above, EPA
proposes that no further controls would
be required at Sanders Lead and that the
proposed controls are sufficient for
RACM/RACT purposes for the Troy
Area, at this time.
Since the Troy Area is projected to
attain the 2008 Lead NAAQS by the
2015 attainment date, and at this time,
no additional measures could be
adopted to attain one year sooner, EPA
proposes to approve Alabama’s
November 9, 2012 SIP submission as
meeting the RACM/RACT requirements
of the SIP Toolkit and that the level of
control in the State’s submission
constitutes RACM/RACT for purposes of
the 2008 Lead NAAQS. By approving
these control measures as RACM/RACT
for Sanders Lead for purposes of
Alabama’s attainment planning, these
control measures will become
permanent and enforceable SIP
measures to meet the requirements of
the CAA and 2008 Lead NAAQS.
5. RFP Plan
Section 172(c)(2) of the CAA requires
that an attainment plan includes a
demonstration that shows reasonable
further progress for meeting air quality
standards will be achieved through
generally linear incremental
improvement in air quality. As stated in
the final Lead Rule (73 FR 67039), EPA
concluded that it was appropriate that
RFP requirements be satisfied by the
strict adherence to an ambitious
compliance schedule, which is expected
to periodically yield significant
emission reductions. The control
measures for attainment of the 2008
Lead NAAQS included in Chapter 6 of
5 Table
found in the Title V permit.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:34 Sep 05, 2013
Jkt 229001
the State’s submittal have been modeled
to achieve attainment of the 2008 Lead
NAAQS. The stipulations require these
control measures and resulting
emissions reductions to be achieved as
expeditiously as practicable. As a result
of an ambitious compliance schedule,
yielding a significant reduction in lead
emissions from the Sanders Lead facility
and resulting in modeled attainment of
the NAAQS, EPA has preliminarily
determined that ADEM’s lead
attainment plan for the 2008 Lead
NAAQS fulfills the RFP requirements
for the Troy Area. EPA, therefore,
proposes to approve the State’s
attainment plan with respect to the RFP
requirements.
6. Contingency Measures
In accordance with section 172(c)(9)
of the CAA, contingency measures are
required as additional measures to be
implemented in the event that an area
fails to meet the RFP requirements or
fails to attain a standard by its
attainment date. These measures must
be fully adopted rules or control
measures that can be implemented
quickly and without additional EPA or
state action if the area fails to meet RFP
requirements or fails to meet its
attainment date and should contain
trigger mechanisms and an
implementation schedule. In addition,
they should be measures not already
included in the SIP control strategy for
attaining the standard and should
provide for emission reductions
equivalent to one year of RFP.
Based on all the improvements that
are planned for Sanders Lead, ADEM
believes that the 2008 Lead NAAQS can
be achieved on a consistent basis.
However, if an exceedance of the
NAAQS occurs during any three month
period after July 2013 (the deadline for
full implementation of the control
strategy), within 180 days, Sanders Lead
will submit an investigative study
identifying the source(s) of excessive
emissions contributing to the
exceedance and will develop and
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
prepare a strategy to eliminate the
likelihood of another exceedance. This
strategy will contain a plan identifying
which stack or stacks will be raised and
to what extent. Within 18 months of the
NAAQS violation(s), these measures
will be fully implemented. Potential
controls which may provide some
additional reductions include:
(1) Adding a second gate on the south
end of the property in order to direct
significant traffic flow to an area further
away from the maximum lead impact
areas;
(2) planting vegetation in specific
areas to help control dust flow patterns
and scavenge fugitive lead emissions;
(3) re-evaluating material handling
procedures, patterns, etc., to determine
if improvements can be made;
(4) re-evaluating housekeeping
procedures, including dust sweeping
and collection equipment; and
(5) implementing other improvements
that may become evident based on
potential source(s) of lead emissions
identified during investigation.
EPA proposes that the contingency
measures submitted by Alabama meet
the section 172(c)(9) requirements for
the 2008 Lead NAAQS.
7. Attainment Date
Alabama provided a demonstration
attainment of the 2008 Lead NAAQS for
the Troy Area by no later than five years
after the Area was designated
nonattainment. The modeling indicates
that the Troy Area will attain the 2008
Lead NAAQS by December 31, 2015,
and therefore, EPA is proposing to
approve the State’s attainment date.
V. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve
Alabama’s lead attainment plan for the
Troy Area. EPA has preliminarily
determined that the SIP meets the
applicable requirements of the CAA.
Specifically, EPA is proposing to
approve Alabama’s November 9, 2012
SIP submission, which includes the
attainment demonstration, base year
emissions inventory, RACM/RACT
E:\FR\FM\06SEP1.SGM
06SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 173 / Friday, September 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
analysis, contingency measures and RFP
plan. The requirement for a RFP plan is
satisfied because Alabama demonstrated
that the Area will attain the 2008 Lead
NAAQS by the proposed attainment
date of December 31, 2015.
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the State, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submittal that
complies with the provisions of the Act
and applicable Federal regulations. 42
U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus,
in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed
action merely approves state law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, October 7,
1999);
• is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule does
not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
List of Subjects
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:34 Sep 05, 2013
Jkt 229001
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: August 22, 2013.
Beverly H. Banister,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2013–21781 Filed 9–5–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 152
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0456; FRL–9396–2]
RIN 2070–AJ58
Notification of Submission to the
Secretary of Agriculture; Pesticides;
Satisfaction of Data Requirements;
Procedures To Ensure Protection of
Data Submitters’ Rights
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notification of submission to
the Secretary of Agriculture.
AGENCY:
This document notifies the
public as required by the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
Act (FIFRA) that the EPA Administrator
has forwarded to the Secretary of the
United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) a draft final rule titled:
‘‘Pesticides; Satisfaction of Data
Requirements; Procedures to Ensure
Protection of Data Submitters’ Rights.’’
The draft regulatory document is not
available to the public until after it has
been signed and made available by EPA.
DATES: See Unit I. under SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0456, is
available at https://www.regulations.gov
or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Regulatory Docket (OPP Docket) in the
Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
54841
Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and
the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional
information about the docket available
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Scott Drewes, Field and External Affairs
Division (7506P), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (703) 347–0107; email address:
drewes.scott@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What action is EPA taking?
Section 25(a)(2)(B) of FIFRA requires
the EPA Administrator to provide the
Secretary of USDA with a copy of any
draft final rule at least 30 days before
signing it in final form for publication
in the Federal Register. The draft final
rule is not available to the public until
after it has been signed by EPA. If the
Secretary of USDA comments in writing
regarding the draft final rule within 15
days after receiving it, the EPA
Administrator shall include the
comments of the Secretary of USDA, if
requested by the Secretary of USDA,
and the EPA Administrator’s response
to those comments with the final rule
that publishes in the Federal Register.
If the Secretary of USDA does not
comment in writing within 15 days after
receiving the draft final rule, the EPA
Administrator may sign the final rule for
publication in the Federal Register any
time after the 15-day period.
II. Do any statutory and Executive
Order reviews apply to this
notification?
No. This document is merely a
notification of submission to the
Secretary of USDA. As such, none of the
regulatory assessment requirements
apply to this document.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 152
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: August 20, 2013.
Steve Bradbury,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2013–21602 Filed 9–5–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\06SEP1.SGM
06SEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 173 (Friday, September 6, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54835-54841]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21781]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0173; FRL-9900-62-Region 4]
Air Quality Implementation Plan; Alabama; Attainment Plan for the
Troy Area 2008 Lead Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a state implementation plan (SIP)
revision, submitted by the State of Alabama through the Alabama
Department of Environmental Management (ADEM), to EPA on November 9,
2012, for the purpose of providing for attainment of the 2008 Lead
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in the Troy 2008 Lead
nonattainment area (hereafter referred to as the ``Troy Area'' or
``Area''). The Troy Area is comprised of a portion of Pike County in
Alabama surrounding the Sanders Lead Company (hereafter referred to as
``Sanders Lead''). EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's November 9,
2012 SIP submittal regarding the attainment plan based on Alabama's
attainment demonstration for the Troy Area. The attainment plan
includes the base year emissions inventory requirements, an analysis of
the reasonably available control technology (RACT) and reasonably
available control measures (RACM) requirements, reasonable further
progress (RFP) plan, modeling demonstration of lead attainment and
contingency measures for the Troy Area. This action is being taken in
accordance with Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and EPA's guidance related
to lead attainment planning.
[[Page 54836]]
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 7, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R04-OAR-2013-0173 by one of the following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. Email: R4-RDS@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (404) 562-9019.
4. Mail: EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0173, Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. Lynorae Benjamin, Chief,
Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2013-0173. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov or
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Zuri Farngalo of the Regulatory
Development Section, in the Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr.
Farngalo may be reached by phone at (404) 562-9152, or via electronic
mail at farngalo.zuri@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What action Is EPA proposing to take?
II. What is the background for EPA's proposed action?
III. What is included in Alabama's attainment plan submittal for the
Troy area?
IV. What Is EPA's analysis of Alabama's submittal for the Troy area?
1. Pollutants Addressed
2. Emissions Inventory Requirements
3. Modeling
4. RACM/RACT
5. RFP Plan
6. Contingency Measures
7. Attainment Date
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What action is EPA proposing to take?
EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's SIP submittal for the Troy
Area, as submitted through ADEM to EPA on November 9, 2012, for the
purpose of demonstrating attainment of the 2008 Lead NAAQS. Alabama's
lead attainment plan for the Troy Area includes a base year emissions
inventory, a modeling demonstration of lead attainment, an analysis of
RACM/RACT, a RFP plan, and contingency measures.
EPA has preliminarily determined that Alabama's attainment plan for
the 2008 Lead NAAQS for the Troy Area meets the applicable requirements
of the CAA and the ``SIP Toolkit--Attainment Demonstrations and Air
Quality Modeling,'' hereafter referred to as the ``SIP Toolkit,'' dated
April 12, 2012, located at https://www.epa.gov/air/lead/kitmodel.html.
Thus, EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's attainment plan for the
Troy Area. EPA's analysis for this proposed action is discussed in
Section IV of this proposed rulemaking.
II. What is the background for EPA's proposed action?
On November 12, 2008 (73 FR 66964), EPA revised the Lead NAAQS,
lowering the level from 1.5 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) to
0.15 [mu]g/m\3\ calculated over a three-month rolling average. EPA
established the NAAQS based on significant evidence and numerous health
studies demonstrating that serious health effects are associated with
exposures to lead emissions.
Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, EPA is required
by the CAA to designate areas throughout the United States as attaining
or not attaining the NAAQS; this designation process is described in
section 107(d)(1) of the CAA. On November 22, 2010 (75 FR 71033), EPA
promulgated initial air quality designations for the 2008 Lead NAAQS,
which became effective on December 31, 2010, based on air quality
monitoring data for calendar years 2007-2009, where there was
sufficient data to support a nonattainment designation. Designations
for all remaining areas were completed on November 22, 2011 (76 FR
72097), which became effective on December 31, 2011, based on air
quality monitoring data for calendar years 2008-2010.
Effective December 31, 2010, the Troy Area was designated as
nonattainment for the 2008 Lead NAAQS. This designation triggered a
requirement for Alabama to submit a SIP revision with a plan for how
the Area would attain the 2008 Lead NAAQS, as expeditiously as
practicable but no later than December 31, 2015. ADEM submitted its SIP
submittal for the Troy Area on November 9, 2012, which included the
base year emissions inventory and the
[[Page 54837]]
attainment demonstration. EPA's analysis of the submitted attainment
demonstration includes a review of the pollutant addressed, emissions
inventory requirements, modeling, RACT and RACM requirements, RFP plan,
and contingency measures for the Troy Area.
III. What is included in Alabama's attainment plan submittal for the
Troy area?
In accordance with section 172(c) of the CAA and the SIP Toolkit,
the Alabama attainment plan for the Troy Area includes: (1) An
emissions inventory for the plan's base year (2010); and (2) an
attainment demonstration. The attainment demonstration includes:
technical analyses that locate, identify, and quantify sources of
emissions contributing to violations of the 2008 Lead NAAQS; analyses
of future-year emissions reductions and air quality improvements
expected to result from national and local programs; adopted emission
reduction measures with schedules for implementation; and contingency
measures required under section 172(c)(9) of the CAA. See 73 FR 67035.
IV. What is EPA's analysis of Alabama's attainment plan submittal for
the Troy area?
A. Attainment Demonstration
Consistent with CAA requirements (see, e.g., section 172), and 40
CFR 51.117, an attainment demonstration for a lead nonattainment area
must include a showing that the area will attain the 2008 Lead NAAQS as
expeditiously as practicable. The demonstration must also meet the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.112 and Part 51, Appendix W, and include
inventory data, modeling results, and emissions reduction analyses on
which the state has based its projected attainment. In the case of the
Troy Area, EPA is proposing that the attainment plan submitted by
Alabama is sufficient, and EPA is proposing to approve individual
components of the plan.
1. Pollutants Addressed
Alabama's lead attainment plan evaluates lead emissions in the Troy
Area within Pike County. There are no significant precursors to
consider for the lead attainment plan.
2. Emissions Inventory Requirements
States are required under section 172(c)(3) of the CAA to develop
comprehensive, accurate and current emissions inventories of all
sources of the relevant pollutant or pollutants in the area. These
inventories provide a detailed accounting of all emissions and emission
sources by precursor or pollutant. In the November 12, 2008 Lead
Standard (PDF) (99pp, 665k) rulemaking, EPA finalized the guidance
related to the emissions inventories requirements. The current
regulations are located at 40 CFR 51.117(e), and include, but are not
limited to, the following requirements:
States must develop and periodically update a
comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all
source affecting ambient lead concentrations;
The SIP inventory must be approved by EPA as a SIP element
and is subject to public hearing requirements; and
The point source inventory upon which the summary of the
baseline for lead emissions inventory is based must contain allsources
that emit 0.5 or more tons of lead per year.
For the base-year inventory of actual emissions, EPA recommends
using either 2010 or 2011 as the base year for the contingency measure
calculations, but does provide flexibility for using other inventory
years if states can show another year is more appropriate.\1\ For lead
SIPs, the CAA requires that all sources of lead emissions in the
nonattainment area must be submitted with the base-year inventory. In
today's action, EPA is proposing to approve the base year emissions
inventory portion of the SIP revision submitted by Alabama on November
9, 2012, as required by section 172(c)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See EPA document titled ``Addendum to the 2008 Lead NAAQS
Implementation Questions and Answers'' dated August 10, 2012,
included in EPA's SIP Toolkit located at https://www.epa.gov/air/lead/kitmodel.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State of Alabama followed EPA's recommendation by using the
year of designation (2010) as the base year in the November 9, 2012
Lead SIP. Actual emissions from all sources of lead were reviewed and
compiled, as applicable and available, for the base year emissions
inventory requirement. All applicable sources of lead emissions
contained in the Troy nonattainment area were estimated and included in
the inventory.
The only source of lead emissions above 0.5 tons per year within
the Troy Area is Sanders Lead, a secondary lead smelting and refining
facility which processes scrap metal and lead bearing by-products into
refined lead alloys. Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.117(e), the facility is the
only point source evaluated as part of this emissions inventory
requirement and is therefore, the only source that is required to be
evaluated as part of this attainment demonstration. In addition to
complying with the 2008 Lead NAAQS, the facility is also subject to the
revised Secondary Lead MACT (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart X). The facility's
emissions were calculated using data collected from stack tests with
the application of AP-42 emissions factors for each source, and quality
assured by ADEM. ADEM used the EPA 2008 National Emissions Inventory
(NEI)\2\ to obtain estimates of the stationary area and nonroad and
onroad mobile emissions for the Troy Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Area sources are only required to be submitted for the NEI
every three years, in accordance with the Air Emissions Reporting
Rule and the most recent release is in the 2008 NEI version 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary area source emissions, shown below in Table 1, were
obtained from the Emissions Inventory System maintained by EPA which
has the most current information. The nonroad emissions are negligible
and therefore assumed to be zero for the purpose of this SIP, and are
consistent with the nonroad 2008 model. The emissions data for the
nonroad category which includes aircraft (airports), rail and
commercial marine vessels was obtained from the 2008 NEI version 2.
Onroad lead emissions are negligible and therefore assumed to be zero,
consistent with MOVES 2010b model and the 2008 NEI. A more detailed
discussion of the emissions inventory development can be found in
Alabama's November 9, 2012 submittal.
Table 1 below shows the level of emissions calculated in pounds per
year (lbs/year) in the Area for the 2010 base year, and by emissions
source categories, as provided in Alabama's November 9, 2012 attainment
plan.
[[Page 54838]]
Table 1--2010 and Projected 2015 Lead Emissions for the Troy Area
[Pounds per year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Onroad Nonroad Area Point
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010............................................ 0 205.94 0.56 7,162
2015............................................ 0 205.94 0.56 946
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total Reduction............................. 0 0 0 6,216
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA evaluated Alabama's 2010 base year emissions inventory for the
Troy Area, and made the preliminary determination that this inventory
was developed consistent with EPA's guidance for emissions inventory.
Therefore, pursuant to section 172(c)(3), EPA is proposing to approve
Alabama's 2010 base year emissions inventory for the Troy Area. The
projected emissions for 2015 represent an 87 percent reduction from the
base year lead emissions, and, as discussed in the modeling section
below, provide sufficient emissions reductions for the Troy Area to
attain the 2008 Lead NAAQS.
3. Modeling
The lead attainment demonstration must include air quality
dispersion modeling developed in accordance with EPA's Modeling
Guidance.\3\ The Alabama modeling analysis was prepared using EPA's
preferred dispersion modeling system, the American Meteorological
Society/Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD)
consisting of the AERMOD (version 12060) model and two data input
preprocessors AERMET (version 11059) and AERMAP (version 11103). The
non-regulatory AERMINUTE (version 11325) meteorological preprocessor
and AERSURFACE (version 08009) were also used to develop inputs to
AERMET. The Building Profile Input Program for Plume Rise Model
Enhancements was also used in the downwash-modeling and incorporated
good engineering practice, and technical procedures. More detailed
information on the AERMOD Modeling system and other modeling tools and
documents can be found on the EPA Technology Transfer Network Support
Center for Regulatory Atmospheric Modeling (SCRAM) (https://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/) and in Alabama's November 9, 2012 SIP submittal in the
docket for this proposed action (EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0173) on the
www.regulations.gov Web site. A brief description of the modeling used
to support Alabama's attainment demonstration follows.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix W (EPA's Guideline on Air Quality
Models) (November 2005) located at https://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/guidance/guide/appw_05.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Modeling Approach
The following is an overview of the Sanders Lead modeling approach
used in Alabama's November 9, 2012 SIP submittal. This approach was
developed by the URS Corporation, on behalf of Sanders Lead, and
revised based on comments received from ADEM and EPA. The basic
procedures are outlined as follows:
Start with the most recent 2010 emissions estimates for
point, area, volume and mobile sources at Sanders Lead;
Develop model inputs using the AERMOD modeling system
including the:
[cir] AERMOD pre-processors AERMET and AERMINUTE to process five
years' (i.e., 2006-2010) 1-minute meteorological data from the National
Weather Service (NWS) Montgomery, Alabama, surface level site
(identified as KMGM) (the closest weather station to Sanders Lead),
based on ADEM's land use classifications, in combination with upper-air
meteorological data from the Birmingham, Alabama, NWS upper-air
sounding site (KBMX);
[cir] AERMOD pre-processor AERMAP to generate terrain inputs for
the receptors, based on a digital elevation mapping database from the
National Elevation Dataset developed by the U.S. Geological Survey;
[cir] AERMOD pre-processor AERSURFACE to generate direction
specific land use based surface characteristics for the modeling;
[cir] Define a Cartesian receptor grid across the nonattainment
boundary (approximately 0.8 miles around the Sanders Lead facility),
with 100 meter spacing in ambient air to ensure maximum concentrations
are captured; and
[cir] Develop all other input options commensurate with the
Regulatory Modeling Guidance.
Perform current and post control dispersion modeling using
the EPA approved AERMOD modeling system;
Process AERMOD output through EPA's LEADPOST post
processor (version 12114) deriving the maximum 3 month average rolling
design value across the 5 year meteorological data period; and
Document the results in a report suitable for inclusion as
an appendix for the Troy Area Lead SIP.
b. Modeling Results
The Lead NAAQS compliance results of the attainment modeling are
summarized in Table 2 below. Table 2 presents the results from the two
sets of AERMOD modeling runs that were performed. The two modeling runs
were the result of using two different five-year (2006-2010)
meteorological datasets based on AERSURFACE-developed surface
characteristics representative of the NWS site in Montgomery, Alabama
(NWS MET Data). The first and second rows of Table 2 present the
surface characteristics representative of the Sanders Lead facility
site (Facility MET Data). This procedure was used since on-site
meteorological data was not available. Modeling with the two sets of
data was also used since on-site meteorological data are not available
at the Sanders Lead facility.
A background ambient air quality concentration is required to be
added to the modeled concentrations for the purpose of developing a
lead design value, such that attainment of the control strategy is
demonstrated. The background concentration for the SIP was based on
speciated air quality data from the Montgomery, Alabama airport monitor
(site number 01-101-1002) from the last two months of 2005 and the
years 2006-2010. The data is recorded and collected once every 6th day.
Monthly averages of the data from this period were obtained and used to
develop the 3-month rolling averaged concentrations. The highest of the
3-month averaged concentrations (i.e., 0.009 [micro]g/m\3\) was used in
the modeled compliance test (see column 3 of Table 2).
As can be seen in Table 2, the maximum 3-month rolling average
across all five years of meteorological data (2006-2010) is less than
or equal to the 2008 Lead NAAQS of 0.15 [mu]g/m\3\ for both sets of
AERMOD modeling runs.
[[Page 54839]]
Output from the LEADPOST processor which details all of the
concentrations can be found in Appendix G of Alabama's November 9, 2012
SIP submittal.
Table 2--Post-Control Modeling Results \4\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sanders lead facility Max 3-mth Background Total Year maximum
impacts rolling average concentration concentration NAAQS occurred
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post-Construction ([NWS] MET 0.144 [mu]g/ 0.009 [mu]g/ 0.15 [mu]g/m\3\ 0.15 [mu]g/m\3\ 2010
Data). m\3\. m\3\.
Post-Construction (Facility 0.139 [mu]g/ 0.009 [mu]g/ 0.15 [mu]g/m\3\ 0.15 [mu]g/m\3\ 2010
MET Data). m\3\. m\3\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The pre-control analysis resulted in a predicted impact of 5.30
[mu]g/m\3\ (NWS MET data) and 3.64 [mu]g/m\3\ (Facility MET data). The
post-control analysis resulted in a predicted impact of 0.15 [mu]g/m\3\
(NWS MET data) and 0.15 [mu]g/m\3\ (Facility MET data). This data
indicates significant reductions in air quality impact with the future
implementation of the post-construction control plan for the Sanders
Lead facility. This data also supports that the controls represent RACM
and RACT for the SIP. The control strategy for the facility as
reflected in its Air Permit No. 210-0005 includes enclosure of the
furnace building and installation of canopy hoods over each blast
furnace and compliance with the Secondary Lead MACT (40 CFR Part 63,
Subpart X). More details on the pre- and post-construction operations
at the facility are included in the Alabama SIP. Therefore, on this
basis, ADEM asserted that the proposed controls are RACM/RACT and
should be sufficient to attain 2008 Lead NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Final results listed in Table 2 are rounded according to 40
CFR part 50, Appendix R; specifically subsection 4(a) which
addresses comparison with the Lead NAAQS, as well as 5(a), (b), and
(c) which addresses rounding conventions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA has reviewed the modeling that Alabama submitted to support the
attainment demonstration for the Troy Area and has preliminarily
determined that this modeling is consistent with CAA requirements,
Appendix W and EPA guidance for lead attainment demonstration modeling.
4. RACM/RACT
a. Requirements for RACM/RACT
CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that each attainment plan provides
for the implementation of all reasonably available control measures as
expeditiously as practicable and attainment of the NAAQS. EPA
interprets RACM, including RACT, under section 172, as measures that a
state determines to be both reasonably available and contribute to
attainment as expeditiously as practicable in the nonattainment area. A
comprehensive discussion of the RACM/RACT requirement for lead
attainment plans and EPA's guidance can be found in the SIP Toolkit.
b. Alabama's Analysis of Pollutants and Sources for the Troy Area
Alabama's analysis is found in Chapter 6 of the November 9, 2012
SIP submittal. The State determined that controls for lead emissions at
Sanders Lead are appropriate in the Troy Area for purposes of attaining
the 2008 Lead NAAQS. EPA preliminarily agrees that Alabama's
determination is supported by its analysis.
c. Alabama's Evaluation of RACM/RACT Control Measures for the Troy Area
On November 9, 2012, Air Permit No. 210-0005 was issued to Sanders
Lead for additional proposed control measures to reduce lead emissions.
The Title V permit reflecting RACT controls is included in Appendix F
of the November 9, 2012 SIP submittal. In accordance with the schedule
in the Title V permit, Sanders Lead was required to implement the
controls on or before July 1, 2013. ADEM represented to EPA that
Sanders Lead has completed implementation of the RACT controls listed
in the permit and summarized in Table 3 below:
Table 3--Summary of RACT Controls \5\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of measure Explanation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Control and Enclose Furnace Sanders Lead is proposing to install
Operations. canopy hoods over each blast furnace
with supply air to reduce worker lead
exposures. Additionally, the furnace
building will be enclosed. A new 318,000
cubic feet per minute (CFM) baghouse
followed by high-efficiency particulate
air (HEPA) filters will be installed to
control emissions captured by the new
hoods and building enclosure (including
the kettle basement ventilation).
Control and Enclose Refining Sanders Lead is proposing to enclose the
Operations. refining building, including the
elimination of sidewall fans. Area
ventilation will be provided by the new
318,000 CFM baghouse discussed above.
Combustion gases and Refining Sanders Lead is proposing to control the
Kettle Hoods. combustion gases and kettle hoods with a
new 60,000 actual cubic feet per minute
(ACFM) baghouse (with HEPAs).
Relocate Industrial Battery Sanders Lead is proposing to relocate the
Decasing and Enclose Raw industrial battery decasing operations
Material Handling Operations. to the inside of the existing raw
material storage building. A new 60,000
ACFM collector with HEPA filters will be
installed to control industrial battery
decasing and raw material storage area.
Battery Breaker/Shredder Sanders Lead is proposing to enclose the
Operations. Shredder Building and install a new
12,000 ACFM wet scrubber to control acid
emissions from specific point locations
within the Shredder Building. The
exhaust from this scrubber along with
building exhaust will be exhausted
through a new 60,000 ACFM bag collector
(with HEPAs).
Enclose Baghouse Hoppers and Sanders Lead is proposing to enclose the
Transport of Dust. base of baghouses 1 and 5, including the access doors and
removable panels on the units.
Ventilation will be provided by ducting
to existing baghouses.
[[Page 54840]]
Improve Process Material In order to eliminate leaded outdoor
Transport to Eliminate traffic, Sanders Lead is proposing to
Leaded Outdoor Traffic. install building connection tunnel for
the transport of material from shredder
to the raw material storage building.
Relocate and Contain Leaded Sanders Lead is proposing to install
Vehicle Maintenance. transfer points at the refining,
smelting and raw material storage
vehicle exits to maintain ``leaded''
vehicles inside the building. Sanders
Lead is proposing to relocate leaded
vehicle maintenance to a newly enclosed
constructed area.
Improved Watering............ Sanders Lead is proposing to develop an
updated watering plan based on the new
vehicle patterns and facility layout.
The watering plan will include an
improved floor wetting system inside and
outside the building, as well as
purchasing new wet sweepers for the
outside buildings.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
d. Proposed Action on RACM/RACT Demonstration and Control Strategy
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Table found in the Title V permit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's determination that the
proposed controls for lead emissions at Sanders Lead constitute RACM/
RACT for that source in the Troy Area based on our analysis described
above. Further, as summarized above, EPA proposes that no further
controls would be required at Sanders Lead and that the proposed
controls are sufficient for RACM/RACT purposes for the Troy Area, at
this time.
Since the Troy Area is projected to attain the 2008 Lead NAAQS by
the 2015 attainment date, and at this time, no additional measures
could be adopted to attain one year sooner, EPA proposes to approve
Alabama's November 9, 2012 SIP submission as meeting the RACM/RACT
requirements of the SIP Toolkit and that the level of control in the
State's submission constitutes RACM/RACT for purposes of the 2008 Lead
NAAQS. By approving these control measures as RACM/RACT for Sanders
Lead for purposes of Alabama's attainment planning, these control
measures will become permanent and enforceable SIP measures to meet the
requirements of the CAA and 2008 Lead NAAQS.
5. RFP Plan
Section 172(c)(2) of the CAA requires that an attainment plan
includes a demonstration that shows reasonable further progress for
meeting air quality standards will be achieved through generally linear
incremental improvement in air quality. As stated in the final Lead
Rule (73 FR 67039), EPA concluded that it was appropriate that RFP
requirements be satisfied by the strict adherence to an ambitious
compliance schedule, which is expected to periodically yield
significant emission reductions. The control measures for attainment of
the 2008 Lead NAAQS included in Chapter 6 of the State's submittal have
been modeled to achieve attainment of the 2008 Lead NAAQS. The
stipulations require these control measures and resulting emissions
reductions to be achieved as expeditiously as practicable. As a result
of an ambitious compliance schedule, yielding a significant reduction
in lead emissions from the Sanders Lead facility and resulting in
modeled attainment of the NAAQS, EPA has preliminarily determined that
ADEM's lead attainment plan for the 2008 Lead NAAQS fulfills the RFP
requirements for the Troy Area. EPA, therefore, proposes to approve the
State's attainment plan with respect to the RFP requirements.
6. Contingency Measures
In accordance with section 172(c)(9) of the CAA, contingency
measures are required as additional measures to be implemented in the
event that an area fails to meet the RFP requirements or fails to
attain a standard by its attainment date. These measures must be fully
adopted rules or control measures that can be implemented quickly and
without additional EPA or state action if the area fails to meet RFP
requirements or fails to meet its attainment date and should contain
trigger mechanisms and an implementation schedule. In addition, they
should be measures not already included in the SIP control strategy for
attaining the standard and should provide for emission reductions
equivalent to one year of RFP.
Based on all the improvements that are planned for Sanders Lead,
ADEM believes that the 2008 Lead NAAQS can be achieved on a consistent
basis. However, if an exceedance of the NAAQS occurs during any three
month period after July 2013 (the deadline for full implementation of
the control strategy), within 180 days, Sanders Lead will submit an
investigative study identifying the source(s) of excessive emissions
contributing to the exceedance and will develop and prepare a strategy
to eliminate the likelihood of another exceedance. This strategy will
contain a plan identifying which stack or stacks will be raised and to
what extent. Within 18 months of the NAAQS violation(s), these measures
will be fully implemented. Potential controls which may provide some
additional reductions include:
(1) Adding a second gate on the south end of the property in order
to direct significant traffic flow to an area further away from the
maximum lead impact areas;
(2) planting vegetation in specific areas to help control dust flow
patterns and scavenge fugitive lead emissions;
(3) re-evaluating material handling procedures, patterns, etc., to
determine if improvements can be made;
(4) re-evaluating housekeeping procedures, including dust sweeping
and collection equipment; and
(5) implementing other improvements that may become evident based
on potential source(s) of lead emissions identified during
investigation.
EPA proposes that the contingency measures submitted by Alabama
meet the section 172(c)(9) requirements for the 2008 Lead NAAQS.
7. Attainment Date
Alabama provided a demonstration attainment of the 2008 Lead NAAQS
for the Troy Area by no later than five years after the Area was
designated nonattainment. The modeling indicates that the Troy Area
will attain the 2008 Lead NAAQS by December 31, 2015, and therefore,
EPA is proposing to approve the State's attainment date.
V. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's lead attainment plan for the
Troy Area. EPA has preliminarily determined that the SIP meets the
applicable requirements of the CAA. Specifically, EPA is proposing to
approve Alabama's November 9, 2012 SIP submission, which includes the
attainment demonstration, base year emissions inventory, RACM/RACT
[[Page 54841]]
analysis, contingency measures and RFP plan. The requirement for a RFP
plan is satisfied because Alabama demonstrated that the Area will
attain the 2008 Lead NAAQS by the proposed attainment date of December
31, 2015.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submittal that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, October 7, 1999);
is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications
as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: August 22, 2013.
Beverly H. Banister,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2013-21781 Filed 9-5-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
